So here's the diffs that seem to indicate we were working with a compiler that wasn't full C99 (or maybe previously we were working with a compiler that had extensions?) https://github.com/dropbox/typed_ast/commit/f7497e25abc3bcceced3ca6c3be3786d8805df41 On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote: > I'll ask my colleague what his compiler setup was. > > On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 3:24 AM, Victor Stinner <victor.stinner at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> 2016-06-04 19:47 GMT+02:00 Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org>: >> > Funny. Just two weeks ago I was helping someone who discovered a >> > compiler that doesn't support the new relaxed variable declaration >> > rules. I think it was on Windows. Maybe this move is a little too >> > aggressively deprecating older Windows compilers? >> >> I understood that Python only has a tiny list of officially supported >> compilers. For example, MinGW is somehow explicitly not supported and >> I see this as a deliberate choice. >> >> I'm quite sure that all supported compilers support C99. >> >> Is it worth to support a compiler that in 2016 doesn't support the C >> standard released in 1999, 17 years ago? >> >> Victor >> > > > > -- > --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) > -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20160607/c5f760fa/attachment-0001.html>
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4